Conclusion: Individualism and the Grantseeker

To paraphrase a statement
John Steinbeck once made: Great ideas come only from
individuals working on their own. American society as we
know it today evolves from a firm belief in rugged
individualism whereby each individual pulls himself up by his or her own bootstraps.
According to prevalent but perhaps
unfair stereotypes, inventors are natural recluses;
scientists jealously guard secret formulas from one another; artists require
uninterrupted solitude in order to work; performers are
temperamental and unable to get along with
their compatriots; grantseekers are noted pariahs, eternally in competition
with one another, and unwelcomed by funders because of their numbers and
incessant demands.

Yet, in apparent contradiction to the tradition of rugged individualism,
a popular doctrine among many funders today is that only second-rate
thinkers work in private. Grants decision makers favor projects
involving established organizations and ideas that affect large
numbers of people. They are impressed by coalitions among grantseekers,
especially when they exhibit an awareness of what others in their
field are doing and a willingness to touch base and cooperate whenever
possible with other grantseekers and funders as well. A grants decision
maker employs one major criterion when evaluating a proposal 
the strength of the individual grantseeker's roots in the community
in which he or she works. Hence, the unaffiliated grantseeker must
stress those aspects of his or her grant project that enable him
or her to cooperate, instruct, or help others in order to make the
idea more attractive to funders.

The endeavor to resolve the apparent conflict
between the American tradition of individualism and the current emphasis on
collaborative work among grantseekers is intrinsic to this discussion. It is
possible to work "on your own" on your idea for a grant while
simultaneously seeking the support of others. Such balance is difficult but not
impossible to achieve.